CAMPOS: A crisis behind bars
By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published March 5, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
If you knew nothing about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama other than that Clinton is a 60-year-old white woman and Obama is a 46-year-old African-American man, you could still calculate the odds that each was in prison.
It won't come as any surprise that someone like Obama is, in this crude comparison, more likely to be found behind bars than someone like Clinton. What should shock people is how much more likely we are to incarcerate a 46-year-old black man than a 60-year-old white woman.
Here's one way of picturing the answer: During football games, the University of Michigan's stadium hosts about 111,000 people. If you filled the place with randomly selected 60-year-old white women, around 10 of them would turn out to be prison inmates. If you did the same with 46-year-old black men, about 5,500 would be current residents of our prisons and jails.
In other words, if we took into account only race, gender and age, Obama's chances of being in prison would be 550 times higher than Clinton's. Here's a good question for a presidential debate: "Do you think 46-year-old black men are 550 times more likely to deserve to be in prison than 60-year-old white women?"
I derived these statistics from a report published by the Pew Center last week. The report got a lot of media attention when it revealed that one in 99 American adults is in prison. That's startling enough, but not nearly as shocking as the fact that more than 10 percent of African-American men between the ages of 20 and 40 are incarcerated.
But of course other factors also play a powerful role in determining who we choose to lock up and for how long. The most important of these is socioeconomic class. Poor people go to prison, while people with money, with rare exceptions, don't.
The extent to which we ignore that reality is highlighted by a glaring omission in the Pew Center's otherwise excellent analysis: There literally isn't a word in it about poverty. One would never guess, from reading the report, that a key factor in determining whether you go to prison and for how long is if you use powder cocaine rather than crack, or if you rob the U.S. Treasury instead of a gas station, or if you are represented by a team of private lawyers rather than a single overworked public defender.
I assume the report's failure to mention such matters involves a strategic silence. It's hard enough to get Americans to focus on the amazing explosion in the size of our prisons (we have 400 percent more people behind bars than in 1980) without upsetting people further by pointing to the role class bias plays in these developments.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world, and the prison population continues to grow, despite a plunge in crime rates over the past 15 years. Nearly a million Americans are behind bars for nonviolent crimes - many of which are "crimes" only because of what political scientist Scott Lemieux has labeled "the war on (some people who use some) drugs."
The report does mention some encouraging developments. Even Texas, whose voters have had an almost unlimited appetite for paying taxes to build and staff more prisons, is finding the costs of locking people up so high that it's beginning to experiment with alternatives to prison.
The most rational alternative would be to stop treating drug use as a criminal offense. A small minority of users of mind-altering substances become addicted to those substances. They should be able to get medical help for what ought to be considered a medical problem, instead of one of the main justifications for keeping 2.3 million Americans behind bars.
Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be reached at paul.campos@colorado.edu.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
March 4, 2008
11:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
jackwoehr writes:
Gene, I can see your point .. it's possible a free country will present more opportunities to go wrong than a less free society and lead to more crime, prisons and prisoners.
However, the easy assumption that all people trapped in the justice system deserve to be there has undone other societies before, notably the French monarchy in 1789. The French monarchy had recourse to draconian law. This pheonomenon is considered by modern scholars to have been a major factor in the French Revolution.
When we have a huge socioeconomic problem the size that the prison system is becoming in Colorado and America, we can wash our hands of it, let it swallow the entire domestic budget, and wait for the revolution.
Or we can try to figure out what's wrong and fix it.
March 5, 2008
1:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
carryBIGstick writes:
I'd rather see criminals in prison rather than not in prison. I understand that many people see people in prison as 'victims'. However, I'm more interested in people paying for there crimes rather than 'rehabilitation'. As a man how happens to be related to many criminals, they choose that life and now they have to face the what they've done. Most people cannot be 'rehabilitated', there of course are exceptions but by and large they don't. Keep the building prisonsand make prison suck.
March 5, 2008
6:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
alcambell_9 writes:
Carry a big stick.
Why is it that the people who don't have first hand knowledge of an issue are the ones having the most adament opinions concerning those issues. Do you really believe pot smokers should go to prison, in many cases, longer than violent offenders of the law. Do you know the percentages of pot smokers who clog up the penal system with non violent offenders to the point that the already over taxed taxpayers are taxed even more to build prisons to make more room for nonviolent pot smokers.Show me the sense in that.
Clear these non-violent people out of the existing prisons and you will have all the room you would ever need to house the true criminals, the violent offenders.Of course there are zealots who want everybody that does not agree with their religious and social dictates to be be incarcerated so they can live in their pristine vision of how the world should be, but they're idiots, loud mouthed and well funded, but stil idiots.
March 5, 2008
8:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
This is the type of issue that Mr. Campos has a huge advantage; he has political correctness on his side.
Of course, an evil conservative like myself is simply a racist and therefore, any points I make will immediately be shot down as a racist comment.
Mr. Campos has the luxury of simply implying things without applying any critical thinking to his implications.
I have said it before and I'll say it again, liberalism is the greatest enemy of the black man since slavery. Mr. Campos wastes an entire column (yet again) on meaningless blather rather than critical thought. Yet, if the black violence we have here was going on in Iraq, he would spend an entire column describing the quagmire over there.
Blacks are murdering blacks at astonishing rates. And what do we hear from Mr. Campos: well, did you know that black men are more likely to go to jail than 60 year old white women? Effing brilliant! Simply brilliant! And he gets paid to write this garbage?
Mr. Campos feels that drug use is not a big deal and should be treated with "medical help". Interesting. So, the poor black man is simply a victim of drug addiction, right? Interesting. Here is a question for you, Mr. Campos: how many blacks live in your neighborhood?
March 5, 2008
8:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
from outrider "did you know that probably..." ??? Is that just something you are making up? Why is it that we don't throw drunks in jail but we do potheads? We've clogged our prisons with people who do not belong in prison. What a mess.
March 5, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
The issue about smoking pot is entirely different from the issue of blacks in prison.
Blacks are in prison because they have a hard time behaving in a civilized society. Plain and simple. I realize such a harsh critique of black culture automatically qualifies me as a racist in the eyes of liberals. So be it.
Liberals do nothing but lecture and blame whites for the failures of blacks. And, believe it or not, that strategy doesn't work to help blacks. Each year, more blacks commit violent crimes, are the victim of violent crime from other blacks, abandon their children, get high, get AIDS, rob, steal cars, burglarize, and generally wallow in a meretricious and mindless pop culture.
The liberals baby-talk the black man because liberals are addicted to black votes. They crave those votes at any cost even if it means destroying the very people that support them. It is a destructive codependent relationship that provides liberals with 90% of black votes while blacks get the pity they want.
March 5, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
freethinker07 writes:
Black men have different behavior patterns than white women. Why? Could it be that the black-male subculture doesn't support healthy lifestyles as well as the white-female subculture does?
Years ago, it was noticed that elderly women, despite having terrible reflexes, have the best driving records. They typically obeyed traffic laws and avoided accidents. Young men with bad grades, despite having wonderful reflexes, had the worst records. Insurance companies started giving elderly women a lower price. Elderly women also had their cars last longer because they didn't abuse them.
What was the lesson here? I told my children that we all should drive like little old ladies. Our insurance costs plummeted.
If we assume that 25% of all black-male incarcerations are due to racism, 25% are due to stereotyping, 25% are due to poverty, and 15% are due to something else PC; that still leaves 540 more black males being incarcerated than white women. Could there be something toxic about their culture?
March 5, 2008
9:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
airbornebigfoot writes:
well, there two kinds of justice in America.
"Justice" is what common everyday people are subjected to.
its harsh, unfair, and destroys many people and families.
often because the person who winds up being the defendant cannot afford expert legal counsel, or the Public Defender's Office sells them down the river.
"Just Us" is for the wealthy, the famous, and usually ends up in the defendant doing twenty minutes in jail for a D.U.I.
Or, as in the case of the Ramseys in Boulder County,
You get to tell the authorities how its going to be,
Like when you'll arrive for your interview with your high powered team of attorneys,
Or better yet, Your someone like Phil Spector, who can just put a gun in someones mouth, pull the trigger, then manipulate the legal system all the way to a mistrial.
The criminal justice system in the United States is broken.
and until we get consistency in the way justice is dispensed across the nation, it will continue to be a joke.
March 5, 2008
9:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
"The criminal justice system in the United States is broken." - airbornebigfoot
Would you say that American black culture is also "broken"?
March 5, 2008
9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnsjohn writes:
"We have the highest incarceration rate in the world, and the prison population continues to grow, despite a plunge in crime rates over the past 15 years."
Mr Campos....can't you see the cause and effect relationship here.
March 5, 2008
10:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
rjnova writes:
You think Compost the reason crime has dropped in the last 15 years is because criminals are in prison and not on the street—Duh? Money for prisons is money well spent. Moreover, more blacks are in prison because more blacks 20-40 yrs old commit more crimes. Your comparison with 60 yr old women makes no sense at all. Why not 10 yr old girls? Now I can agree there could be some alternatives to prison for some drug abuse crimes but a free pass is not an alternative. I am sure you believe you and your friends should be able to do drugs without penalty. Tax payers will only have to pay for your care at a later date when your brain is fried. A legitimate question is why they have to pay for your care at all.
The reason the Feds go after the users is they are generally easier to find than traffickers. Users can be in a fixed location, be employed, etc. But interdiction has been a failure because the demand is there so the users are an easier target. Dealers however should always be subject to prison.
And poverty is only a cursory explanation of a bigger problem created by the unintended consequences of the Great Society and ADC which destroyed the black family. Young blacks commit more crimes because they lack education, family support and more specifically lack of a father in the family. You Libs always want a pass on that because your intentions were pure.
No a permanent welfare class has been created and the damage done will take years and billions of dollars to fix, if at all. But liberals/academics blaming culture or society are wrong headed. Until you people step up and accept responsibility for the damage done, a new start is not on the horizon.
March 5, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
wow writes:
Campos is my hero...Finally someone had the guts to point out the real danger to today's society. We should be incarcerating more of those cake baking, purse toting, silver haired hussies who destroy our peace of mind. I can't sleep at night for fear my children will be lured by the promise of cookies. Let's treat people equally...
March 5, 2008
12:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
nativegirl writes:
The Crips vs. The Red Hat Societies
A menace!! All of them!!!
March 5, 2008
1:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnsjohn writes:
I think a root in liberal thinking is that the incarceration percentages of minorities should always equal the percentages of minorities in the general population, and any deviation is evidence of discrimination, or of minorities not given a fair shake by the criminal justice system.
I would suggest to Mr. Campos that he go to any district court during the time that arraignments are held. Watch our criminal justice system work madly to plea bargain as many cases as possible, regardless of race. First time offenders get passes much of the time and the real goal of the system is to cost effectively keep cases from going to trial. You would think Monte Hall was working the crowd.
Were it possible, check out the criminal history of any of the so called victims serving time. Just how many breaks does one deserve who likes to prey on society?
March 5, 2008
4:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Every time I read one of Paul's columns, I ask myself a question: How would Professor Campos grade this piece if it were submited by one of his students?
In this effort he wastes a hundred words on his stadium metaphor, suggests a black vs white dilemma, crack vs powder cocaine, poor vs rich, and then seems to settle on legal aid vs real lawyers as his cause of the unfair stadium.
He chooses the greatest demographic contrast possible - black men vs white woment. At no point does he address the more generic men vs women divide. And he very carefully diverts the reader's attention from the question: "Who commits the most crime?"
I wonder, does he write these as a gag? He surely doesn't expect to convince anybody, does he?
March 5, 2008
6:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
Konyok writes:
Gene, obviously it's a vanity thing. He probably gets a couple of hundred per column, so, it's not like he's motivated by honest greed. He gets the ego trip of a byline with a photo. Periodically he flames fellow law professors and gets slapped around in the blogosphere. (The usual comment is: "Campos beclowned himself ...") He seems to enjoy shocking the rubes, as it were.
Early on he earned a bit of credit by slamming Ward Churchill and by questioning the "obesity epidemic." But, it seems that maybe he strayed too far from the reservation and has been heroically *progressive* ever since.
Still, his reasoning is SO shoddy it almost seems a parody. Could he just be pulling our legs?
March 5, 2008
6:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
arby writes:
I really enjoyed reading all of the above. But it all comes down to one thing. $$$$$. If you've got it you walk. If you don't you do the time. No matter the color of your skin. It's the American way.
March 5, 2008
7:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
"Still, his reasoning is SO shoddy it almost seems a parody. Could he just be pulling our legs?" - Konyok
I have often wondered the same thing. He often exhibits a meandering unconnected thought process that I would expect from many posters on this forum, but not from a paid writer.
This leads me to another question: why does RMN pay for his columns? What does RMN get out of it? What are the requirements for becoming a columnist at RMN? How does RMN measure the success or failure of a columnist?
Also, I have been wondering if the traditional columnist format is still relevant in the age of the Internet. There is something very stale about having a columnist submit a piece and then sits back and lets the masses talk about it.
Modern columnists should be required to spend time in these forums answering questions and defending their positions.
To be quite honest, I think I would much rather read many of the discussions on this forum in the newspaper than read most of the RMN columnists.
March 6, 2008
9:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
jconder45 writes:
John_II:
"Blacks are in prison because they have a hard time behaving in a civilized society. Plain and simple."
Yeah, everything is "plain and simple" for you, isn't it? Thank you for illustrating so nicely the point I made on the other thread: modern "conservatism" (in quotes because it has very little to do with the authentic Judeo-Christian tradition) is all about telling American upper and middle-class whites "all the problems in this country are the fault of the minorites and those evil white liberals who abet them. You are responsible for nothing; if it weren't for the minorities and the liberals, everything would be fine".
March 6, 2008
12:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
"Your defensiveness about being called racist pretty much tells the story..." - Charles B.
Well, if you say so. But, I am defensive because I am not a racist although I have grave concerns about our black population. It seems that every time I raise these concerns in a matter that does not blame anyone else but blacks themselves, I am either called a racist outright or implied to be a racist as you have just done.
I would have to say that my biggest domestic concern in this country is the welfare of the black population. Something has gone terribly wrong with them. Blacks are dying in this country at extraordinary rates. Yet we still cannot talk honestly about their plight.
I cannot fathom the rational that causes folks like Mr. Campos and yourself to spend time blaming whites and people like me for the black crisis.
Do I fear black men? Yes I do. If you ever find yourself venturing into a black dominated area, keep your guard up because you have just ventured into an area with higher crime rates than any other area.
Sure, it is easy for liberals to blame rich whites and high-priced lawyers for the black's plight. It is so easy isn't it? You can claim a moral high ground. You can position yourself as some kind of hero for the downtrodden.
So, stupid scumbags like Mr. Campos can live in a rich white dominated city, hosting wine & cheese tasting parties, and talking with fellow professors about how evil the right wing is. Trust me, I have been to these little dinner parties with oh-so-nuanced professors. They talk about their sympathy and pity for the blacks and minorities. Yet, their racism is real. They pity minorities. They pity minorities because they do not believe they (minorities) are capable of raising themselves from their own plight.
I do not pity blacks. I want to help them help themselves. I want more Thomas Sowell's, more Clarence Thomas's, more Michael Steele's, more Colin Powell's.
Mr. Campos's columns sickens me. He never even comes close to assigning blame on the black man. Which, by the way, is interesting because the overwhelming majority of these criminals are male, regardless of race. So, using his logic (and yours), are we to assume that women are able to afford better lawyers than men?
March 6, 2008
12:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
By the way, there is a very high chance that Michael Steele will be McCain's running mate. I could not be happier for such a political prospect.
March 6, 2008
1:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jeff writes:
"I do not pity blacks. I want to help them help themselves. I want more Thomas Sowell's, more Clarence Thomas's, more Michael Steele's, more Colin Powell's."
Soooo, you're saying that the way for "blacks" to "help themselves" is come around to your way of thinking in sociopolitical matters?
Let me use that logic on you, for a moment:
"John, you're obviously a flawed person with racist tendencies. However, I want to help you. To begin with, I'll tell you which political candidates to vote for (all Democrats, ha-ha-ha-ha) and I'll also tell you which entertainment is acceptable for you to view. What's that? You don't like my plans for you? Well John, I'm only trying to help you. It's really sad that you're not willing to embrace my ideas for you. I was only trying to get you out of your dire beliefs. Sheesh, there's no talking to some people..."
So, did that seem patronizing to you? Are you at all offended, or are you ready to turn your identity over to me?
P.S. Are you John Gibson? You talk (or, write) exactly like he does.
March 6, 2008
1:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
Jeff,
That is not exactly what I was suggesting. But, let us be honest, blacks need direction not a handout. Sure, you may characterize my position as "patronizing". But, my community is not engulfed in violence, crime, disease, and stupidity.
Whites make up over 70 percent of the population yet contribute less than 50% of all murders. Blacks make up 14% of the population yet account for half of all murders and murder victims.
So, yes, if your community is so destructive as to account for 50% of all murders, being patronized is a small price to pay. Of course, liberalism's approach is much more palatable but that does not mean it is beneficial.
Therefore, yes, I want blacks to come around to my way of thinking in terms of marriage, fatherhood, sexual behavior, cultural entertainment, moderation, and civility.
Of course, this is not easy for blacks to hear. But, they have put themselves in the position that others now suggest a better way for them to live. Except for liberals. They simply tell blacks to stay cool, keep singing, keep jumping for that ball, keep rapping, keep being our national jester and we will provide you with sugar-coated sympathy.
March 7, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
flimflam writes:
You honestly have to pity conservatives. The pretzel like logic of believing that America is the most free nation in the world and advocating for a smaller government while simutaneously defending the worlds largest prison system must be very tiring.
March 7, 2008
3:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
I don't see the contradiction, flimflam. Just because we are a free nation does not mean you are free to murder, steal, assault, or rape.
March 7, 2008
4:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
epaminondas writes:
John II, you are hilariously pathetic. Please keep your obsessive fixation with the message board alive. I am going to love it when a 'black' is your President. Another one of them darker, younger, richer people doing better than yourself.... I bet the injustice of it is going to drive you to the next level of insanity. Keep on writing the non-sense, it is truly entertaining. Do not worry: one day you will have convinced everybody that you are the undisputed message board champion of the world and then you can finally go back to living your very fulfilling life. It is because of fools like you that I can't help myself from coming back every week to this little column in the middle of nowhere; I swear it's like watching southpark.
March 7, 2008
6:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
Achilles writes:
Paul Campos (epaminondas)
"I am going to love it when a 'black' is your President."
Really? Even if it is Michael Steele? I couldn't be happier with a McCain/Steele ticket. And, considering McCain's age there is a good possibility of a President Steele.
I'll see you next week, Paul, when your next piece of crap is published.
March 8, 2008
3:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
jestbill writes:
"In other words, if we took into account only race, gender and age, Obama's chances of being in prison would be 550 times higher than Clinton's. Here's a good question for a presidential debate: "Do you think 46-year-old black men are 550 times more likely to deserve to be in prison than 60-year-old white women?""
OK, you recite your statistics and your opponents recite theirs. Then, having each described some part of the elephant, you all go back to calling each other names.
You indicate that age and gender don't explain much. You say it might have to do with "class." Your opponents don't deny "class," they just say "race." The fact that socioeconomic class and race tend to be correlated doesn't seem to matter to any of you. Grow up.
March 12, 2008
10:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
T1anda writes:
Campos writes.... "Obama is a 46 year old African-American man" Isn't Obama BI-Racial?? Wasn't his mommy white????? I guess he just wants to be the first black(???) man to occupy the White House!!! lol!!!